Rain, not dam releases, behind current flood

Bridie Jabour

Rising waters empty homes again

Residents at Enid Street in Goodna near Brisbane were badly hit by the January floods in 2011. Some had only just finished restorations to their homes. Now, they must pack up again with flooding predicted to inundate the street on Monday night. Photo: Harrison Saragossi

As the water rises and southeast Queenslanders get a sense of deja vu, they're being assured this time the flood has nothing to do with the region's dams.

Despite the Wivenhoe Dam level increasing from 89 per cent to 119 per cent in the space of 24 hours and being expected to reach about 140 per cent by the end of the week, the water released from the dam in the few past days has had little to no impact on flooding.

In 2011 huge dam releases from an almost full Wivenhoe Dam inundated thousands of homes in southeast Queensland but the 2013 flood can be attributed to one simple thing – rain. And lots of it.

Ex-tropical cyclone Oswald was originally expected to dump its 200-300 millimetres of rain on Brisbane and the Sunshine and Gold Coasts.

Advertisement

Instead, it fell west of Brisbane in the catchments which flow into the capital's rivers and creeks.

"The flood that we're seeing right now is primarily, almost totally, due to the floodwaters coming downstream of the Wivenhoe Dam," Premier Campbell Newman told reporters on Monday.

"The Bremer, Lockyer and Laidley rivers and a number of smaller creeks that come all the way down between Wivenhoe and Brisbane CBD - that's what's driving this.

"Wivenhoe is doing its job, Somerset is doing its job."

Bureau of Meteorology hydrologist Andy Barnes agreed.

"Really, it's pretty simple, there's been a lot of rain in the catchments," he said.

"That runs off into the rivers and creeks and eventually works its way to Brisbane.

"Too much water in the channel means the river level rises and you get the floods. It's a natural process really."

When asked if the dam releases had anything to do with the current flooding Mr Barnes replied "no".

The dam is at 100 per cent when the water supply is full, but it can hold an extra 1.5 million megalitres of water - taking it to 200 per cent - for flood mitigation.

More water will be released from Wivenhoe once floodwaters start to recede, by which time the dam level is predicted to be 140 per cent.

Seqwater's spokesman Mike Foster said the government's decision to reduce the dam to 88 per cent had given engineers extra flood storage space.

"The best way to explain it is the drinking water compartment is 100 per cent full and we've started to store water in the flood compartment," he said.

"For us the message is the majority of the flood mitigation storage, is well and truly available for use."

46 comments

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Let the sledging begin.

Commenter

High and Dry

Location

Because I read the news a week ago!

Date and time

January 28, 2013, 8:49PM

Just applying the same logic that the NewMan used with the last premier Peter. If one can be blamed then they must all be blamed. Or perhaps this will prove that the other flood came from outside of the catchment area and make all claims for damages null and void? And as for the NewMan being responsible he didn't listen to advice from SEQwater and released water from the Dan. Seeney didn't listen to advice of dam engineers and SEQwater and let the levels go above 75%. Because they have been using this and the health payroll system to lay blame on the previous administration when they failed at this and still haven't fixed the health pay roll system. That's why Peter. That's why they're to blame for this. And grow up. You live in Brisbane, not brisneyland or Brisvegas, still an overpriced big country town...

Commenter

John Michaels

Date and time

January 29, 2013, 10:58AM

Who do you blame?Not me said the rain.

Read it all at:http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/environment/weather/wivenhoe-to-release-water--but-not-on-seqwaters-advice-20130125-2dbkl.html

"Water find its own level" said the wiseman.Only if we leave it strictly to nature without any decision from mankind.

Water is costly and no longer free and with the minimisation of usage,flooding may be a regular event for now and in the future with the deluge coming jointly from mankind and nature.

Without adequate scientific calculations and predictions and understanding of what is timely required is no salvation.

Commenter

Wonderland

Location

Brisbane

Date and time

January 29, 2013, 10:48PM

If it was the governments fault last time it's the governments fault this time. Actually this time they didn't even need to release any water but the NewMan ignored SEQwaters advice. That makes him pretty responsible for it if you ask me.

Commenter

John Michaels

Date and time

January 28, 2013, 9:24PM

So Newman is responsible for the flood? Did he leave a tap running all week or something?Why is it then when a "natural" disaster hits - some is to blame?Grow up!

Commenter

Peter@Brisneyland

Date and time

January 29, 2013, 6:31AM

Peter@BrisneylandNewman overrode the experts and ordered a release.The timing of the release was unfortunate as it would interact with the rainfail runoff, increasing flood levels.The dam was not 'full', it was <90%, then on top of that figure we have another 100% flood mitigation capacity. There was no need to release water.

Working inside this government I see a common theme whereby we are forced to do something (anything) so that it looks like we making progress in 'reducing the deficit'.

What is the most annoying part is that these actions cost Qld more $$$ in the long term than they supposedly save.

Such a disappointing attitude and government.

Commenter

J

Location

Brisbane

Date and time

January 29, 2013, 9:31AM

Peter, the Newman Government got elected because they blamed the previous Government for the last flood. Great political tactics. Then, they very cleverly heaped more and more blame on them for overspending ,which was mostly for the huge clean up. Anna Bligh did not have the foresight to open up all the States books and tell us the facts of where and how all the disaster dollars were being spent.

Commenter

Rod

Location

the Coast

Date and time

January 29, 2013, 10:19AM

I don't understand - where did the water from Wivenhoe go then if not into the catchment area between the dam and Brisbane?

Obviously the dam release has not caused the flood but surely you can't say it hasn't added to the height of the river???

Aren't we expecting a long dry spell ahead - I hope we won't miss the water that has been released.

Commenter

???

Location

Brisb

Date and time

January 29, 2013, 1:42PM

Sad to say the dam has added to our problems again due to political interference and confusion about the dam's role. Now the dam is over full again with several months of the wet season still to come. Only a couple of months ago the advice was to lower the dam to 75% but the Govt chose to ignore that advice, we always need more water don't we Mr Seeney When they realised they should have listened to that advice it was too late AGAIN.

Commenter

Leonard

Location

Brisbane

Date and time

January 28, 2013, 9:27PM

Like this time and 2011 the water that flooded most people did not come from the dam. If the dam was not there at all we would all be screwed.Cant take legal action for some cash against mother nature. The dam is the next in line..If my house burns down do i blame the fireman because he did not get there soon enough or fail to warn me that fire will burn it down.Where does it end..

Related Coverage

28 Jan
Residents at Enid Street in Goodna near Brisbane were badly hit by the January floods in 2011. Some had only just finished restorations to their homes. Now, they must pack up again with flooding predicted to inundate the street on Monday night.